The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, ensuring personal liberty and just legal processes, which must be upheld during bail considerations.

JUDGMENT

N.S.Shekhawat J.

The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No.173 dated 11.11.2020 registered under Sections 302, 34 of IPC, at Police Station Machhiwara Sahib, Police District Khanna, District Ludhiana.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was not named in the present case. As per him, the FIR in the present case was initially registered against unknown persons on 11.11.2020, with regard to occurrence dated 09.11.2020. However, on 16.11.2020, the statement of Gurpreet Singh, brother of the deceased was recorded, wherein he stated that he had heard the talks of petitioner, Pawanpreet Singh @ Pawani and Kuldeep Singh @ Sima about causing murder of his brother Gurpreet Singh. He further contends that similarly placed co-accused, Kuldeep Singh @ Sima and Pawanpreet Singh @ Pawani have already been granted the concession of bail by this Court. He next contends that the petitioner was arrested in the present case on 17.11.2020 and is in custody for the last more than 03 years. As per him, only three witnesses, out of total 16 witnesses have been examined so far and the custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose.

3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that there are serious allegations against the petitioner and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of "Ranjan Dwivedi v. CBI, through the Director General, 2012 (8) SCC 495; 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 880" as follows:-

"14. In Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, (supra), another Constitution Bench considered the right to speedy trial and opined that the delay is dependent on the circumstances of each case, because reasons for delay will vary. This Court held :

"84. The right to a speedy trial is a derivation from a provision of Magna Carta. This principle has also been incorporated into the Virginia Declaration of Rights of 1776 and from there into the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution of United States of America which reads, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial...". It may be pointed out, in this connection, that there is a Federal Act of 1974 called 'Speedy Trial Act' establishing a set of time-limits for carrying out the major events, e.g., information, indictment, arraignment, in the prosecution of criminal cases. [See Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edn. page 1400].

85. The right to a speedy trial is not only an important safeguard to prevent undue and oppressive incarceration, to minimise anxiety and concern accompanying the accusation and to limit the possibility of impairing the ability of an accused to defend himself but also there is a societal interest in providing a speedy trial. This right has been actuated in the recent past and the courts have laid down a series of decisions opening up new vistas of fundamental rights. In fact, lot of cases are coming before the courts for quashing of proceedings on the ground of inordinate and undue delay stating that the invocation of this right even need not await formal indictment or charge.

86. The concept of speedy trial is read into Article 21 as an essential part of the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed and preserved under our Constitution. The right to speedy trial begins with the actual restraint imposed by arrest and consequent incarceration and continues at all stages, namely, the stage of investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal and revision so that any possible prejudice that may result from impermissible and avoidable delay from the time of the commission of the offence till it consummates into a finality, can be averted. In this context, it may be noted that the cons